The court established that concurrent proceedings under different forums should be managed to ensure fair trial rights and avoid conflicting judgments.

J U D G M E N T

Basant,J The petitioner is the husband and the 1st respondent is his wife. Respondents 2 and 3 concededly are not necessary parties in this writ petition, they being the mother and sister of the petitioner herein.

2. The wife of the petitioner, that is the 1st respondent, has initiated proceedings against the petitioner before the Family Court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act and before the Family Court seeking identical reliefs. The petitioner has a contention that such parallel proceedings are legally not maintainable. However, in the course of arguments, it is submitted that the court need not go into that larger question now and it may be ensured that both proceedings do not continue simultaneously. If they continue simultaneously, the right of the petitioner to raise all appropriate contentions and substantiate the same before the concerned fora would be fettered. In these circumstances, it is prayed that appropriate directions may be issued to safeguard the interest of proper conduct of the case of the petitioner before the two fora.

3. The learned counsel for the 1st respondent was requested to specify which proceedings she wants to continue with immediately. The learned counsel, after taking instructions, submits that the 1st respondent will be satisfied if the proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act pending before the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram that is M.C.No.73/09 is proceeded with, at the first instance. It is prayed that appropriate direction for expeditious disposal of the said proceedings may also be issued.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner agrees to that course. Accordingly, we are satisfied that this writ petition can be allowed and appropriate directions can be issued.

5. In the result, a) This writ petition is allowed in part. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Malappuram is directed to dispose of M.C.No.73/09 initiated by the 1st respondent against the petitioner and others as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of four months from the date on which a copy of this judgment is placed before the learned Magistrate.

b) The learned Judge of the Family Court, Malappuram is directed to stay all further proceedings in O.P.No.342/2010 till M.C.No.73/09 is disposed of by the learned Magistrate as per directions in clause (a) above.

c) We make it clear that the order of attachment passed in O.P.No.342/2010 by the Family Court, Malappuram shall continue to remain in force until further directions of the Family Court.

d) We further make it clear that this order will not fetter the rights of the petitioner to raise all appropriate contentions in the O.P. pending before the Family Court.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)

(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)

jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge R.BASANT & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.

.No. of 200 ORDER/JUDGMENT

19/07/2010